2008
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2007.08.007
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Algorithms for two-dimensional cutting stock and strip packing problems using dynamic programming and column generation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

3
42
0
6

Year Published

2010
2010
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 120 publications
(103 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
3
42
0
6
Order By: Relevance
“…The sum of the running time of gcut1-gcut13 is 23 seconds from the work of Cintra et al (2008) and the sum of the running time of all the other instances except for UU1-UU3 and W1-W3 is 10,404.07 seconds from the work of Young-Gun et al (2003). In contrast, the running time of our DPH algorithm are 1.65 seconds and 42.62 seconds, correspondingly.…”
Section: Test On Benchmark Problemsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…The sum of the running time of gcut1-gcut13 is 23 seconds from the work of Cintra et al (2008) and the sum of the running time of all the other instances except for UU1-UU3 and W1-W3 is 10,404.07 seconds from the work of Young-Gun et al (2003). In contrast, the running time of our DPH algorithm are 1.65 seconds and 42.62 seconds, correspondingly.…”
Section: Test On Benchmark Problemsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Meanwhile, Young-Gun et al (2003) have also proposed a best-first branch-and-bound algorithm based upon a bottom-up approach. Most recently, Cintra et al (2008) have also solved various kinds of cutting stock problems by using dynamic programming and column generation techniques. In solving the U_2DCP, the authors have further improved the dynamic programming approach proposed by Beasley (1985a) by reducing the size of sets of canonical dissections within L and W and by using more efficient computer programming techniques such as binary search.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations